|
I
have to admit, I had never heard of Marshall Microphones. My first
thought when I came across a reference to them was "when did Marshall
start making mikes?" Intrigued, I checked their website at Marshall
Electronics (not affiliated with Marshall Amps) and discovered they offer
a wide range of microphones. I am reviewing the MXL2001-P, 1"
large diaphragm microphone here.
I received the 2001-P direct from Marshall. The first thing
I noticed was its weight. At 470 grams, this microphone feels substantial
and capable. Its machined brass body gives it a solid, durable feel. It
is also very attractive as you can see from the image below and to the
right. (Seen with the MXL56 shock mount).
The MXL2001-P employs a large capsule, gold-sputtered diaphragm
that is coupled through an electromagnetic screen to a FET preamp and
provides balanced transformer output. According to Marshall, the balanced
transformer coupling allows for long cable runs without significant signal
loss. Marshall claims that the microphone will provide high sensitivity
that results in more detailed recordings. This claim turned out to be
true.
The 2001-P features the specifications below:
Technical Specifications:
Type: Condenser pressure gradient mic with large
25mm diaphragm capsule
Frequency Response: 30Hz-20KHz
Polar Pattern: Cardioid
Sensitivity: 15mV/Pa
Impedance: 200 ohms
S/N Ratio: Ref. 1 Pa (A weighted) 80dB
Equivalent Noise Level IEC 268-4 (A weighted):
20dB-A
Max SPL for 0.5% THD: 130 dB
Power Requirements: Phantom power 48V ± 4V
Current Consumption: 3.0mA
Size: 50mm × 190mm
Weight: 470 g
Metal Finish: Black
The microphone frequency response is depicted below in the graph. The
microphone has a mostly flat response from its front side, employing a
cardiod pattern. You might notice that the microphone has a peak response
for frequencies between 3000 - 7500 kHz from the backside of the microphone.

Sound Quality:
I used the microphone throughout a series of reviews of soundcards and
software for this site. Throughout, the 2001 worked very well and sounded
very good. I discovered, as claimed, that it was very sensitive. For instance,
my studio sits in a converted portion of my garage. If I was not careful,
I would pick up a wide variety of "non-studio" sounds - my children,
the cat, the washer and dryer and the furnace to name a few. This aside,
I subjected the microphone to a variety of sound tests.
Discrete
sounds:
I was curious about recording discrete sounds. So, I recorded my hands
rubbing together six inches from the microphone. I could hear the rustle
of my skin on skin, including the change in tone when my fingers would
cross my palm and then my palm would cross my other palm. Kind of a "swee-ooshh"
sound, for lack of a better term. I recorded my keys jangling in my pocket,
placing my ever-present coffee cup on the table and opening and closing
my studio door. All of these sounded accurate, clear and present.
Musical Instruments:
On a musical note, I recorded a variety of instruments. These included
harmonica, guitar, flute (bamboo, Native American), drums, and electric
guitar. The 2001-P performed to my expectations. Most notably,
I recorded both my Native American flute and my bamboo flutes. This was
a bit of a challenge because of the aperture noise that can dominate when
recording flute. I found that after careful placement I was able to record
each instrument quite easily. I was able to distinguish between the sound
of the aperture and notes on each flute. More importantly, I was able
to pick up the particular timbre of the cherry flute versus the bamboo
flute. Very nice.
Making Music:
My main instrument is a steel string acoustic guitar. I recorded it in
a variety of ways, flat-picking, finger-picking, alternate tuning drone
picking and with a slide. The microphone picked up the full range of the
guitar including the overtones of the high strings. The response was quite
flat with a crisp though subtle peak on the high tones. As a test, I plucked
at harmonics while keeping a drone D-tuned bass string going. I was able
to clearly distinguish between these tones.
Vocals:
I am a singer-songwriter so I recorded my vocals. Again, (for better or
worse) the microphone accurately depicted my voice. I varied the volume
of my voice and closeness of my placement to the mike throughout the test.
The microphone proved capable of handling a wide dynamic range from very
quiet vocals to suddenly very loud vocals. (This is not surprising with
an SPL specification of 130dB). However, as compared to my voice, I thought
the microphone faired better on the instruments. When I got real close
to the microphone, my vocals had a touch of an overdriven compressed sound
to them. I partially eliminated this with careful placement in my small
studio but whenever I ventured close to the mike it would return to a
degree. The microphone is very sensitive, even off-axis. It could have
been picking up signals bouncing around the room resulting in phase cancellation
of something. Nonetheless, a vocalist will want to be aware of the sensitivity
of the microphone and its interplay with the recording environment. I
imagine this microphone would work beautifully with a large choir where
it could be placed a bit further away from the walls and the sounds could
develop longer. Unfortunately, I did not have a large choir at my disposal
to work with. I am working on that though.
Conclusions:
At $199.00, the MXL2001-P is a knockout microphone that competes
well with other more expensive microphones. It is smooth and very responsive
to instruments and easily handles a full dynamic range. The microphone
is clear, with crisp highs and robust lows. At this price it is an outstanding
bargain.
|